 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / November 2005E6 Processing
I've been toying with the idea of getting into slide film developing and have been doing some research on the subject. Most notably I've been looking into mixing my own E6 chemicals and I found this "how to" guide: http://www.opie.net/orphy/photo/dr/wkft-e6.html Here, the writer gives a step-by-step breakdown of how to mix the chemicals and how to do the processing. However, he notes (in note 1) that at some point in the processing you need to expose the film to light. Another site that I saw mentions that an advantage of E6 processing over other slide film processing methods (such as E4) is that this step is not necessary. So, here's the question: what is he talking about? This sounds to me like a very tricky step that could easily scrap all of your hard work and probably one to be avoided if possible. Is this really necessary and, if not, then is there a step that needs to be done instead (some sites I saw mention a "reversal processing" step using a different chemisty. I'm confused. Can someone please explain? tia, rts > http://www.opie.net/orphy/photo/dr/wkft-e6.html > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > over other slide film processing methods (such as E4) is that this step > is not necessary. > I'm confused. Can someone please explain? > > tia, > rts Early (domestic) reversal processes required (2nd.) exposure of the film to light after the first developer, and before the colour developer stage. It was simple, and I did it without problem, using a white Xmas pudding basin to hold the film under water in a transparent spiral beneath a suitable lamp. E6 uses a special chemical stage which effectively does the 2nd.exposure without needing to remove the film from the light-tight tank. I assume that you're after repeatable results, rather than simply proving you can do it. If so, and if this is your first attempt at reversal processing, I'd strongly recommend that you use commercial chemicals. There's too many variables (like accurate temperature control and precise timing for the 1st. developer) to make life more difficult by mixing your own chemicals. When you're comfortable with the processes, buy your scales, raw chemicals and have fun.  SignatureM Stewart Milton Keynes, UK http://www.megalith.freeserve.co.uk/oddimage.htm > I've been toying with the idea of getting into slide film > developing [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > tia, > rts The formula for the second developer shown does not have a fogging agent in it, commercial E-6 second developers do. The silver halide left in the emulsion after the first development in any reversal process must be made developable either by exposure to light or by a chemical fogging agent. There are a number of home-brew formulas for color work, you may be able to find one that includes the fogging agent, but I don't have sources. The results should be the same either way but a fogging reversal developer is more convenient and may have an advantage in more uniform and complete fogging of the halide. A fogging second developer or a fogging intermediate bath is sometimes called a reversing bath. Signature--- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA dickburk@ix.netcom.com For the record, E-4 was the first Ektachrome process to have a chemical reversal bath. It used a different chemical than the E-6 does. > I've been toying with the idea of getting into slide film developing > and have been doing some research on the subject. Most notably I've [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > tia, > rts > For the record, E-4 was the first Ektachrome process to have a chemical > reversal bath. > > It used a different chemical than the E-6 does. For the record, I don't care. I suggest you go around to all of those websites and posts that mention the light based reversal process as a part of Process E-4 and correct them as you seem to have nothing better to do with your life. Thanks to all who answered my questions. Appreciated. > > For the record, E-4 was the first Ektachrome process to have a chemical > > reversal bath. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > part of Process E-4 and correct them as you seem to have nothing better > to do with your life. I know my sh.t. They don't. > Thanks to all who answered my questions. Appreciated. In fact, the reversal was done in the color developer. > > For the record, E-4 was the first Ektachrome process to have a chemical > > reversal bath. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > part of Process E-4 and correct them as you seem to have nothing better > to do with your life. I know my sh.t. They don't. > Thanks to all who answered my questions. Appreciated. >I know my sh.t. They don't. At least that's SOMETHING you know. :-) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant. Now I can do what I enjoy: Large Format Photography Web Site: www.destarr.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - : > For the record, E-4 was the first Ektachrome process to have a chemical : > reversal bath. : > : > It used a different chemical than the E-6 does. : For the record, I don't care. I suggest you go around to all of those : websites and posts that mention the light based reversal process as a : part of Process E-4 and correct them as you seem to have nothing better : to do with your life. : Thanks to all who answered my questions. Appreciated. Please ignore the troll. If we all ignore it, it will go away. Signature------------------- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you you were too hard on UC, he was right (at least once). the method you refer to is an old method by E. Gehret later adopted by many parrots. it is far from the original formulae. it may give some image, but it will not be an optimal one. Mainly due to variations in pH, different developing agents. original e6 uses stannic salts as 'reversing' agent. e4 used boron based compound. in original e6 a film hops from stop/reversal directly into color developer. you can use plain vinegar thing instead and afterwards expose both sides of film to light. at this stage you can't damage the image. since paranoia erupted around the world (we fight a war on terror, courtessy of some moron from Texas) it is difficult to buy chemicals.ot to mention loss of liberties by an average citizen. I would recommend buying 5L kit instead. You can dilute a part of it, say to get 1 L. >I've been toying with the idea of getting into slide film developing >and have been doing some research on the subject. Most notably I've [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >tia, >rts > you were too hard on UC, he was right (at least once). I have an ongoing battle with UC. He/she/it often shows up on my posts to either abuse or show off. As far as I'm concerned he/she/it exhibits unacceptable behaviour. > > you were too hard on UC, he was right (at least once). > > I have an ongoing battle with UC. He/she/it often shows up on my posts > to either abuse or show off. As far as I'm concerned he/she/it exhibits > unacceptable behaviour. Best way to deal with the troll is to ignore the ignoramus. or kill file the twit once and for all. SignatureWould thou choose to meet a rat eating dragon, or a dragon, eating rat? The answer of: I am somewhere in the middle. Shve it up your a.s, fuckface. > > > you were too hard on UC, he was right (at least once). > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > a dragon, eating rat? The answer of: I am somewhere > in the middle. it's him/her/its same in depth thinking, variety of arguments. >Shve it up your a.s, fuckface. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> a dragon, eating rat? The answer of: I am somewhere >> in the middle. I would not disagree in general, however, he/she/it may be sick and posted something with merit. >> you were too hard on UC, he was right (at least once). > >I have an ongoing battle with UC. He/she/it often shows up on my posts >to either abuse or show off. As far as I'm concerned he/she/it exhibits >unacceptable behaviour. >>I have an ongoing battle with UC. He/she/it often shows up on my posts >>to either abuse or show off. As far as I'm concerned he/she/it exhibits >>unacceptable behaviour. > >I would not disagree in general, however, he/she/it may be sick and >posted something with merit. If UC is Scarpitti, as many here seem to believe, then he/she/it, as you put it, is probably spending most of his/her/its time fighting extradition from Canada. I suspect his/her/its continual venting of its spleen in this newsgroup is an effective way to blow off steam (perhaps lighting fires and blowing up construction equipment was, too) but it's unfortunate that we have to be around to watch. http://officer.com/article/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=20019 http://brianoconnor.typepad.com/animal_crackers/2005/07/tre_arrow__clos.html Trees, evidently, spoke to him and told him to change his name to Tre Arrow. I wonder what spoke to him and told him to change it to Uranium Conspiracy? SignatureThor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com "The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky Thor Lancelot Simon spake thus: >>> I have an ongoing battle with UC. He/she/it often shows up on my >>> posts to either abuse or show off. As far as I'm concerned [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > If UC is Scarpitti, as many here seem to believe, It is; of that, there's no doubt. > then he/she/it, as you put it, is probably spending most of > his/her/its time fighting extradition from Canada. I suspect [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > http://officer.com/article/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=20019 > http://brianoconnor.typepad.com/animal_crackers/2005/07/tre_arrow__clos.html No way; that's got to be a different Michael Scarpitti. This one's a rightwinger who would never get involved in "eco-terrorism". Unless it's all some kind of an elaborate cover ... Signature... asked to comment on Michigan governor George Romney's remark that the army had "brainwashed" him in Vietnam—-a remark which knocked Romney out of the running for the Republican nomination—-McCarthy quipped, "I think in that case a light rinse would have been sufficient." (Eugene McCarthy, onetime candidate for POTUS) >> http://officer.com/article/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=20019 >> http://brianoconnor.typepad.com/animal_crackers/2005/07/tre_arrow__clos.html > >No way; that's got to be a different Michael Scarpitti. This one's a >rightwinger who would never get involved in "eco-terrorism". Even the middle initial matches -- as well as the general paranoid lunacy and the crazed tendency for weird pseudonyms. If you search on "Tre Arrow" you'll find some more reports on his antics. SignatureThor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com "The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky Thor Lancelot Simon spake thus: >>> http://officer.com/article/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=20019 >>> http://brianoconnor.typepad.com/animal_crackers/2005/07/tre_arrow__clos.html [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > and the crazed tendency for weird pseudonyms. If you search on "Tre > Arrow" you'll find some more reports on his antics. Nah, different guy: the one on the lam is 26 and seems to care passionately about the environment, however misguidedly. "UC", on the other hand, is evidently older (judging from his posts) and couldn't give a sh.t about trees--just Leicas, apparently. Lots of people share the same name, you know. Signature... asked to comment on Michigan governor George Romney's remark that the army had "brainwashed" him in Vietnam—-a remark which knocked Romney out of the running for the Republican nomination—-McCarthy quipped, "I think in that case a light rinse would have been sufficient." (Eugene McCarthy, onetime candidate for POTUS) >Thor Lancelot Simon spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Nah, different guy: the one on the lam is 26 and seems to care >passionately about the environment, however misguidedly. Well, the reporting on the first extradition hearings last year said he was 30. I think "Michael J. Scarpitti" is a sufficiently uncommon name that I doubt there are two of them out there. Plus, consider the habit of insane name changes -- "Uranium Conspiracy", "Tre Arrow", etc -- I still think they are probably the same guy. SignatureThor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com "The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky My middle initial is 'A'.there is another MichaelAScarpitti, perhaps a distant relative, in the Akron area. > >Thor Lancelot Simon spake thus: > > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > "The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be > abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky > I've been toying with the idea of getting into slide film developing > and have been doing some research on the subject. Most notably I've [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > tia, > rts In the standard Kodak E-6 processing the reversal step is done chemically so that you don't need to expose your film to light in the middle of the process. Slide processing is very complicated. To get the best you should use Kodak E-6 chemicals. If you want to experiment keep in mind your result may be off and the images you get may fade quickly. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.